• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

New Turf

Everybody's right. We should have just cut out the old logo with box cutters and glued it to the new field like the cats did. Cuz that looked so much freaking better.

Quit bitching people
 
BadlandsGrizFan said:
Everybody's right. We should have just cut out the old logo with box cutters and glued it to the new field like the cats did. Cuz that looked so much freaking better.

Quit bitching people
This! Some people will always find something about which to complain.
 
Wa-Griz in final stages of turf replacement

AJ MAZZOLINI [email protected]

UM athletics required approval from the Montana University System Board of Regents to replace its football turf one year ahead of schedule. The new field costing upwards of $470,000, will be paid for mostly by the Grizzlies's $625,000 paycheck from playing at Washington in 2017.

The Griz will practice at the River Bowl this week until the turf is finished being installed.

Last fall, when the Montana football team released its preseason practice schedule, a Griz staffer remarked about the program's shift from workouts at the Riverbowl Fields toward practices exclusively inside the confines of Washington-Grizzly Stadium.

"When you've got the Taj Mahal," he quipped.

Well the Griz can't set foot in their gridiron temple right now. It's getting its floors redone.

The Griz will hold their first week of practices at the Riverbowl, just a few hundred yards northwest of their stadium home, while artificial turf replacement at Wa-Griz concludes this week. The first practice -- set for Tuesday at 9 a.m. -- comes two weeks into a three-week installation process that's flying by at lightning speed.

"If we had done this earlier in the summer, I don't think we would have moved at as frenetic of a pace," said Kent Haslam, Montana athletic director.

The cause for the rush, obviously, is to get the Griz back to their normal routine ahead of the Sept. 3 home opener against Saint Francis. But the reason the project didn't start until July 25 is a little more complicated.

UM athletics required approval from the Montana University System Board of Regents -- because the project cost was in excess of $350,000 -- to replace its football turf one year ahead of schedule. Haslam said the final bid from FieldTurf, the company contracted to provide all artificial playing surfaces in Montana, was $478,000.

The Griz got the OK on July 19 because the current surface was beginning to be a safety concern, Haslam said, and because FieldTurf agreed to delay billing until 2018. That gives UM time to earn its $625,000 paycheck from playing at Washington in 2017 and hand the majority of it off to FieldTurf.

FieldTurf worked on four football fields in Montana this summer. Wa-Griz is on the list with Rocky Mountain College's Herb Klindt Field and Daylis Stadium in Billings, Butte High's Naranche Stadium and Missoula County Stadium here in town.


Installation at Washington-Grizzly should be complete by Monday, Aug. 15 just in time for the Grizzlies' first scrimmage. That 4 p.m. contest is open to the public and inside the stadium.

Fans that day will get the first look at the state-of-the-art surface and its new field design.

Still patrolling midfield is the massive grizzly bear logo, the image measuring 13 yards by 9 yards. When FieldTurf and Grizzly athletics were toying with ideas for the logo, the current bear was too hard to ditch, Haslam said.

"It's iconic. I didn't want to be the one to take that out," he said, adding other discussed options included a script "Griz" logo, bear paw or state of Montana outline.

The field will also feature an 8-yard-long Big Sky Conference logo across each 25-yard-line, a mandate from the league that only Montana had not adhered to previously, and two more subtle logos at the 37-yard-line.

The maroon circles are the brainchild of associate AD Chuck Maes as a way of honoring Montana's No. 37 legacy jersey that's passed down among Treasure Staters on the defensive side of the ball. Helena native Caleb Kidder currently holds the heralded jersey.

Maroon end zones with white all-caps "MONTANA" and "GRIZZLIES" stand at opposite ends of the field separated by 100 yards of alternating light and dark green 5-yard strips.

"Two-toned green is the new thing right now," Haslam said. "I'm an old baseball guy so I love looking at the turf and the colors and how it's mowed and all that."

Of course the artificial grass at Wa-Griz won't need to be mowed. The field consists of plastic fibers that mimic grass with a newly laser-leveled base of sand and rubber filling below. FieldTurf had initially anticipated adding a layer of cork on top as a more advanced cooling system, but Montana's time crunch kept that from happening.

"We'll get the turf in now and do it at a later date. We backed them into a corner (with the schedule)," said Haslam, who expects the addition after the season.

It's also because of that time schedule that the old turf has already been rolled up and hauled away to be repurposed by FieldTurf, Haslam lamented. Unlike when the field was last replaced in 2008, sections were not cut out prior to removal as keepsakes for fans.

A chunk was saved as a memento for the athletic department's use, Haslam said, but every inch of the strip is spoken for.
 
Here's a question and keep in mind, it's just a question. With this turf costing north of 400,000 and needing to be replaced every 8-10 years, what were we spending to keep the grass up? It seems like a lot, but I don't know. I like it a lot, but from a money aspect, is it saving or costing? I know many athletes like grass from a safety aspect on knees and toes as well. On the other hand, hitting the ground on the field in Conrad and the other 1B fields may as well have been concrete.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
G&B said:
Yukon said:
[tweet]https://twitter.com/UMGRIZZLIES_FB/status/760574387804180480[/tweet]

It could just be me but that does not look Maroon!

Took a look today...the end zones do kind of have that KMart reddish maroon look. :agree:
 
dupuyer griz said:
Here's a question and keep in mind, it's just a question. With this turf costing north of 400,000 and needing to be replaced every 8-10 years, what were we spending to keep the grass up? It seems like a lot, but I don't know. I like it a lot, but from a money aspect, is it saving or costing? I know many athletes like grass from a safety aspect on knees and toes as well. On the other hand, hitting the ground on the field in Conrad and the other 1B fields may as well have been concrete.


Personally, one of the best things that ever happened for the Griz football game was the installation of the 'Sprinturf,' or whatever the so-called artifical turf was referenced as. I'd have to admit, the playing surface that Idaho State had previously was a dangerous surface to play on. But I've heard the opposite of related football injuries being enhanced moreso on natural grass surfaces. When making comparisons.
This because of a wetness that makes the grass surface slippery. Hence, feet coming out from under a player running. Resulting in whatever twists and turns that incurs on ankles and knees.
 
havgrizfan said:
The new turf and endzones looks so nice. Just an awesome enhancement to Wash-Griz.

Was in town this weekend and hiked the M this morning. It looks fantastic. It is an upgrade over the sprinturf. It pops now. The sprinturf always looked a little drab to me. The endzones look great too. You guys are worrying over nothing. It is definitely an upgrade.
 
grizatwork said:
havgrizfan said:
The new turf and endzones looks so nice. Just an awesome enhancement to Wash-Griz.

Was in town this weekend and hiked the M this morning. It looks fantastic. It is an upgrade over the sprinturf. It pops now. The sprinturf always looked a little drab to me. The endzones look great too. You guys are worrying over nothing. It is definitely an upgrade.

Look at all of the improvements that are happening right now and are beginning to happen in Missoula. We could be like some other teams that their stadium upgrades have stopped, be happy for what we are very fortunate to have.
 
grizatwork said:
havgrizfan said:
The new turf and endzones looks so nice. Just an awesome enhancement to Wash-Griz.

Was in town this weekend and hiked the M this morning. It looks fantastic. It is an upgrade over the sprinturf. It pops now. The sprinturf always looked a little drab to me. The endzones look great too. You guys are worrying over nothing. It is definitely an upgrade.

This will likely look a little duller when they add the rubber to it. Still a sweet field.
 
I hate it! For that kind of money, you'd think they would put in hash marks and numbers. Kent Haslam is ruining this program!!
 
Ursa Major said:
I hate it! For that kind of money, you'd think they would put in hash marks and numbers. Kent Haslam is ruining this program!!
Its keeping with the PC culture of not being judgmental (since hash marks would enable teams to be judged). Instead of whether you actually got far enough to make the first down, your success will be measured on your approach to getting there. If you can justify the method you used then you'll be awarded a first down. Think of it as "Common Core meets football"... Oh the joys of Progressivism.
 
dupuyer griz said:
Here's a question and keep in mind, it's just a question. With this turf costing north of 400,000 and needing to be replaced every 8-10 years, what were we spending to keep the grass up? It seems like a lot, but I don't know. I like it a lot, but from a money aspect, is it saving or costing? I know many athletes like grass from a safety aspect on knees and toes as well. On the other hand, hitting the ground on the field in Conrad and the other 1B fields may as well have been concrete.

From what I remember reading awhile ago, it is actually cheaper going with the field turf. No more paying to watering it, fertilizing it, weed control, mowing, painting the lines, #'s, and logos, and overall payroll for the people that would take care of the field.
 
Grisly Fan said:
Ursa Major said:
I hate it! For that kind of money, you'd think they would put in hash marks and numbers. Kent Haslam is ruining this program!!
Its keeping with the PC culture of not being judgmental (since hash marks would enable teams to be judged). Instead of whether you actually got far enough to make the first down, your success will be measured on your approach to getting there. If you can justify the method you used then you'll be awarded a first down. Think of it as "Common Core meets football"... Oh the joys of Progressivism.
:lol: :lol: :clap:
 
mtgrizzly said:
From what I remember reading awhile ago, it is actually cheaper going with the field turf. No more paying to watering it, fertilizing it, weed control, mowing, painting the lines, #'s, and logos, and overall payroll for the people that would take care of the field.
Cost analysis of natural grass vs Field Turf.

http://www.wellesleyma.gov/pages/WellesleyMA_SpragueResources/Turf%20vs.%20Natural%20Grass-Cost%20Analysis.pdf

Forbes Magazine disagrees:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2014/09/28/how-taxpayers-get-fooled-on-the-cost-of-an-artificial-turf-field/#cfe91301bcaa
 
Back
Top